GuardEntry MCP Server
OfficialRelated Servers
Alternatives to GuardEntry MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides a policy-controlled MCP gateway that lets agents invoke tools with explicit policies, bounded execution, scoped visibility, and decision receipts.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceProvides a single MCP endpoint that dynamically discovers, routes, policy-checks, and executes hundreds of MCP tools from any agent, with optional LLM-based routing.8 npm1Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceGoverns AI agent tool calls by checking them against Agentic Control Plane policies, returning allow/deny/ask decisions with audit logging and identity attribution for MCP clients like Claude and ChatGPT. Exposes acp_check and acp_status tools for policy enforcement and connection verification.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceWraps your existing MCP servers and checks each tool call against policy and live state before it runs. Allow, block, or require a refresh, with a reason the agent can act on.5-

evav-gatewayofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceGoverned MCP gateway that lets AI agents call tools with policy enforcement, prompt-injection screening, a kill-switch, and tamper-evident signed audit logs.Apache 2.0- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables OpenAI-compatible clients to access external tools, APIs, repositories, and data sources through MCP with allowlisting, approval, and argument validation, deployable as a FastAPI service or Python library.MIT
TDQS
Scored across 12 tools
Most tools target distinct resources and actions, such as listing risks, invoking agents/skills, and managing policies. The main potential confusion is between guardentry_invoke_agent and guardentry_invoke_skill, but their descriptions clarify that one invokes an entire agent while the other invokes a single skill. guardentry_chat is a broad catch-all that overlaps with some read operations, but its natural language interface makes it distinct enough.
All tool names share the guardentry_ prefix and use snake_case, which is good. However, the naming pattern is inconsistent: several tools follow a clear verb_noun structure (list_risks, invoke_agent, evaluate_action, get_agent_policy), while others lack a verb or use noun-only names (chat, compliance_status, action_status). This mixed convention makes the set slightly less predictable.
With 12 tools, the set is well-scoped for a governance/compliance platform covering risks, compliance, agents, skills, and policies. Each tool addresses a distinct concern, and the count stays within the ideal 3-15 range without feeling bloated or sparse.
The toolset covers core read operations and several actions, such as listing risks, invoking agents/skills, and updating policies. However, there are notable gaps: no dedicated create/update/delete tools for risks or controls, no tool to list agents, and no way to approve or reject pending actions directly. guardentry_chat can handle some writes indirectly, but this creates a dependency on a general-purpose tool.